Food aid, criticized in earlier days as a potentially harmful
means of surplus disposal, has come to be regarded more and more
as a positive tool of development assistance. A study carried out
by Professor Hans W. Singer of the Institute of Development
Studies, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK, in consultation with
the staff of the World Food Programme (WFP), appears in document
WFP/CFA: 5/5-C, March 1978. The following is a chapter-by-chapter
summary.

CHAP. I. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS
General Considerations

The approach adopted in this survey has of necessity been
selective, since the literature on food aid is vast and
wide-ranging. In line with the Committee's directives,
the survey is concentrated on certain key issues, the
clarification of which can help to make food aid a more
effective instrument of development assistance.
Accordingly, in the following three chapters of the
report, an attempt has been made to review critically
studies dealing with the impact of food aid on local food
production and on government policies and its role in
support of labour-intensive works and nutritional
improvement. It is hoped that the lessons gleaned from
such a review can be useful to the Committee on Food Aid
Policies and Programmes and to member governments in
evolving policy guidelines that will gear food aid more
closely to nutrition, production, employment, and other
development objectives, in line with the recommendation
of the World Food Council at its Third Session in June
1977.*

It has not been an easy task to draw general policy
conclusions from the literature surveyed. For one thing,
there were considerable methodological differences in
approach on the part of the writers on the subject, and
both an explanation of the different points of view and a
choice between them is often difficult without an
analysis of the theories underlying them - which would
have rendered the study unduly long and complex.
Moreover, in a more general perspective, there have been
changes in thinking on food aid in line with new views on
development itself. Analyses have become more dynamic and
pay closer attention to institutional factors. More
stress is now laid on income distribution, employment,
and the satisfaction of basic needs. This has meant that,
in general, attitudes toward food aid have evolved in a
more favourable direction than, say, in the 1950s or
1960s, especially among writers specializing in the
subject, as opposed to those dealing more broadly with
development issues. Lastly, there has been a growing
stress on the dangers of urban bias in development, as
opposed to the alleged disincentive effect of food aid on
food production in the recipient countries. Emphasis on
the role of agriculture has been growing, and it is now
regarded as vital to assess whether the main benefits go
to the consumers in the towns or to the rural areas. This
new preoccupation has not yet fully worked itself through
in the literature and should perhaps be borne in mind as
a new factor, despite the great stress laid on it in the
present paper.

Development thinking partly reflects, and partly
interacts with, changes in the objective situation. Apart
from the wide geographical range and variety in the types
of food aid provided, conditions have changed
considerably between the time when food aid started, in
the 1950s, and the present day. Many recipient countries
have acquired greater skill and experience in handling
food aid and indeed have made great progress both
economically and administratively in general terms. But
perhaps more important is the change from a situation of
permanent donor surplus to one in which a considerable
proportion of the cereal imports of the poorer developing
countries represents a structural deficit that cannot be
financed in commercial terms, at least until their local
food production has been helped to expand.

Finally, it should be noted that the emphasis in the
literature surveyed has been more on quantifiable
economic problems than on those of administration and
managerial implementation, however important these may
be. The report is focused largely on the impact of food
aid on the recipient countries, and deals only
marginally, if at all, with food aid policies in donor
countries or organizations, or the extent and nature of
leverage by them.

CHAP. II. IMPACT OF FOOD AID ON LOCAL PRODUCTION AND
GOVERNMENT POLICIES

Despite the complex considerations described above,
certain fairly clear conclusions emerge. First of all,
theoretical analysis gives no proof that aid, if properly
handled, has serious disincentive effects on food
production in recipient countries. Where a case has been
made for such short-term effects, these have been far
outweighed by the general advantages accruing to the
economy if the opportunities offered by food aid for
expanding overall consumption and investment are properly
utilized.

Case studies of specific countries generally support this
conclusion. To be sure, the empirical literature is
heavily concentrated on the Indian experience and should
therefore be regarded as providing tentative general
conclusions, in view of the size and special
circumstances of that country. However, studies of other
countries at different stages of development (e.g.,
Greece, Israel, Pakistan, Turkey) on the whole point in
the same direction.

In particular, case studies show that the recipient
countries have used, with varying degrees of success, a
number of policy instruments for absorbing significant
quantities of food aid in the context of accelerated
development. The chief ones are: (a) the matching of food
aid with other resources to finance an expanded scope of
development (including domestic food production); (b) the
utilization of government revenue (or savings) obtained
from food aid for investment or for subsidies tending to
reduce unit costs in agriculture, so as to offset
short-term downward pressures on prices; or directly for
incentive payments to farmers on a general or selective
basis; (c) the building up of grain stocks for security
and price stabilization purposes; and (d) the
distribution of food aid through differentiated
(non-commercial) channels.

Food aid should aim not only at stimulating development,
but also at promoting a pattern of development geared to
the satisfaction of basic needs, vulnerable groups,
employment, labour-intensive technology, and more equal
income distribution. These aims can be more effectively
achieved by the use of counterpart funds from food sales
for these purposes- especially in agriculture, the
allocation of food aid to specific types of projects (see
paragraphs 17 to 25 below) and by sales through
differentiated channels.

The study concludes that distribution through
differentiated channels is particularly desirable because
of its effectiveness in reducing downward pressures on
food prices and because it can be used to reach specific
target groups: the poor, the unemployed, the
undernourished.

Differentiated distribution can be done on a relatively
large scale through sales at subsidized prices in
"fair price shops" or through special rationing
systems. On a usually smaller scale, it takes the form of
distribution in kind to beneficiaries through
supplementary feeding programmes and food-for-work
schemes - the so-called project approach. However,
special distribution channels such as "fair price
shops" could also be used with advantage in the case
of development projects, particularly the larger,
multi-purpose schemes, where distribution in kind may not
be feasible because of administrative difficulties and
high internal transport costs. Such a policy would have
the further advantage of reducing the risk of food aid
acting as a fiscal drug (i.e., inducing governments to
ask for excessive quantities of food aid, merely in order
to obtain larger revenue from sales).

The risk of disincentives does not seem to exist where
the food aid is given in the form of agricultural inputs,
as for example feed grains, milk powder for the
development of local processing, blending, or dairy
industries. This also suggests the value of combining
food aid with the provision of other agricultural inputs,
e.g., fertilizer and seeds, as well as the use of revenue
derived from food aid for lowering unit costs of
agriculture by providing needed inputs.

A good deal of what appears as criticism of food aid for
its alleged disincentive effect, on either local
producers or government policies, applies equally to
financial aid and to commercial imports. The context of
food aid makes such disincentive effects on the whole
less rather than more likely.

Impact of Food Aid on Government Policies

There is no clear-cut distinction between the direct
impact of food aid on prices and the indirect one on
policies (including price policy). Food aid is often
submerged by other more potent forces shaping government
policy. Food aid, too, because of fungibility (i.e., the
possible transfer of food aid benefits to other sectors),
blurs the issue.

The evidence so far produced is inconclusive and largely
influenced by the country concerned or the point in time
selected by the analyst.

Critics of food aid tend to conclude that its impact on
government policy is negative, that it promotes
indifference to local agriculture (or at least food
production) and urban bias. The actual effect depends
essentially on the stage of development of the
government, on its commitment to development, and its
sensitiveness to pressures strengthening its agriculture.
Critics of food aid have usually taken it for granted
that, in the absence of such aid, governments would
respond to the increased pressure for local food supplies
by offering greater incentive to local farmers. However,
they might equally well "squeeze" the farmers
by adopting such measures as compulsory food purchases by
the state and by banning commercial sales.

Some critics have also pointed out that food aid usually
arrives at the main port; differentiated distribution is
easier to organize in the urban areas. Even projects such
as the feeding of vulnerable groups are easier to set up
in urban areas. In short, food aid creates urban bias. In
addition, it may preempt the best storage and milling
facilities. But there is now a far greater appreciation
of the key role of agriculture in development, and hence
of the likelihood both of pressures to improve the
situation on both counts (urban bias and pre-empting of
facilities) and of the governments responding to such
pressures.

CHAP. III. FOOD AID AND LABOUR-INTENSIVE WORKS

Writers note a general tendency among those employed in
food-for-work projects to prefer cash to food, partly
because of the "charity" connotation sometimes
associated with such schemes. However, most anatysts
agree that food aid through works can both promote
development by providing additional income and
employment, especially in the rural areas and among the
poorer sections of the population, and increase food
consumption in families through "leakages" from
the workers. The inflationary effects of food-for-work
projects are less than those of "straight"
public works paying all wages in cash, since most of the
additional food demand generated can be satisfied from
commodity aid. As with public works in general,
food-for-work projects will have greater chances of
success and of avoiding inflation if they can use idle
productive resources and draw on capital - domestic or
foreign- to meet the nonfood expenses in the execution of
the works.

The use of food for labour-intensive works does not
necessarily require direct payments in kind. There should
be increased scope for the sale of food to raise revenue
for the financing of such works.

Labour-intensive works supported by food aid should lay
more weight on directly productive activities, such as
land improvement, irrigation, drainage, and
reforestation. However, roads serve a useful purpose in
giving rural areas access to towns and hence to markets
and to new approaches to production. There should also be
greater scope for maintenance activities, if only to
ensure that the schemes launched with the help of food
aid can be carried on efficiently after the cessation of
aid. Poor maintenance limits the productive value of
labour-intensive works, and it is easier to organize
maintenance projects than new (construction) ones.
Renewed interest in maintenance and rehabilitation
activities would enable poorer countries to benefit more
fully from food aid allocations, and local communities
might be involved to a greater extent.

All measures should be taken to improve the productivity
of labour-intensive works, though account should be taken
of the inclusion of old and disabled people in the ranks
of beneficiaries (in other words, of the assistance
element). Complementary resources should be made
available for reasonable equipment and tools (which tend
to be skimped), and the experience thereby gained should
be used to build up a labour-intensive technology in line
with the needs of developing labour surplus countries,
and more particularly the rural areas in the off season.
Conversely, small farmers and agricultural workers are
not covered by food aid in the seasons when they are
faced with major energy-consuming tasks such as
harvesting, planting, and weeding. Similarly, cattle may
be used at these times for such operations as threshing,
and may also be in need of better feeding. (Public works
would not be appropriate then, because they would
interfere with the labour needs of farmers.) Food aid
provided for this purpose would help directly to increase
agricultural production.

Writers stress the importance of improving motivation
(which is affected by such factors as a prejudice against
food-for-work, poor tools, and imperfect communication
with the authorities), but disagree as regards the
solution, e.g., on the potential role of community
development as a framework for such projects.

CHAP. IV. FOOD AID AND SUPPLEMENTARY FEEDING

Supplementary feeding schemes represent additional
consumption on the part of vulnerable groups such as
infants, expectant and nursing mothers, and
schoolchildren. More research is needed on the
nutritional effects of such schemes, especially on the
last group. The objectives of feeding programmes are
usually multiple - being non-nutritional as well as
nutritional- and must be judged on all their objectives,
especially as there is often a cumulative interaction
between the different objectives involved (health,
education, and nutrition). This consideration militates
in favour of an integrated, or at least closely
coordinated, approach in which feeding schemes form one
element in a wider programme designed to raise the
well-being and health of poorer and more vulnerable
groups.

More study is also needed on possible negative aspects of
feeding programmes, such as the effects of habituation to
new foods beyond the reach of beneficiaries when aid
ceases. Such study could help develop useful guidelines
in avoiding habituation. A greater effort, too, should be
made to link such schemes with the increased consumption
and production of local food by means of new and
acceptable products.

Close attention should be given to logistic
administrative and storage problems, which largely
determine the degree of the success of the programmes.
Generally speaking, it is advisable to study the impact
of an intensive programme of sufficient volume and
duration for a small, carefully selected target
population (e.g., poorer children, or people in
especially poor regions- tribal or otherwise- and other
minority groups). The result of a concentrated approach
would be more illuminating than a larger, scattered
programme.

Since, in the case of the poorest children, attendance at
school may not be possible (and hence they would be
excluded from the benefit of school food schemes),
special measures may be necessary involving community
participation. Hence, generally speaking, the most
effective supplementary feeding programmes will be those
taking place in the context of a basic needs strategy by
shifting income to poorer groups- an aim that converges
with the general aims of food aid through food-for-work
schemes. Special care should be taken to ensure that
these schemes benefit rural populations as much as urban
ones, since it is easier to set up such programmes for
towns.